K P RAGHAVAN Vs. M H ABBAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, by special leave, arises out of proceedings started on a complaint filed by one M. H. Abbas against the two appellants, of whom appellants No. 1, K. P. Raghavan, was Sub-Inspector of Police posted at Kumbala Police Station, and appellant No. 2, Kunhi Raman, was the Station Writer of that Police Station. The complaint was filed on the allegation that the complainant had cultivation. jointly with one Seedi, of water melons in a field 'to the west of his house near a railway line, in Mogral village, and some adjoining fields were cultivated by others, two of whom were cited as his prosecution witnesses; they are Abdulla (page No. W. 2) and Amdunhi (page No. W. 3). The telegraph wires running along the railway line passed over the fields of these two witnesses. The wires once broke down and it was found that a portion of the wires was missing. In that connection, two police constables went to the shop of Abdulla P. 'W. 2, and questioned him at about 2-30 p. m. to find out if he had any knowledge about the missing telegraph wires. P. W. 2 accompained, the police constables to the fields also, but did not find any broken wires. Thereafter, the police questioned P. W. 3, Amdunhi, and subsequently they also questioned these persons about the complainant and his partner Seedi. In pursuance of this information, the complainant was taken to the police station on the ground that the Sub-Inspector wanted him. They arrived at the Police Station at about 4 p.m. At about 5 p.m. Seedi was bought to the Police Station. Appellant No. 1, the Sub-Inspector, returned at about 6 or 6-30 p.m. and he then questioned them about the wires which had broken down over their fields. All the four persons denied any knowledge about it, whereupon appellant No. 1 saying "Don't you know it" gave slaps on the face of P.W. 2 and two fist blows on his chest. The complainant protested. Then, appellant No. 1 took hold of the complainant's shirt ,took him inside a side-room, asked him to remove the shirt and undervest and wrist watch, and said to him that he should tell the truth and confess. Thereafter, he gave him blows on the neck and fist blows on the chest. The complainant felt pains, raised cries and fell down. Thereafter, appellant No. 1 asked appellant No. 2 to bring a ruler and with that he gave blows on the soles of the feet of the complainant until the complainant lost consciousness. The prosecution case was that the complainant regained his consciousness in the hospital.

(2.) One M. C. Abdulkhadar, P. W. 5, came to the Police Station and asked appellant No. 1 to release the four persons where after the complainant was taken out of the room helped by the police constables. When the police constables let go of him he fell down, whereupon P. W. 5, M. C. Abdulkhadar, went away saying that he did not want to interfere. While he was going away, he met P. W. 6, Ahamedkutty, the elder brother of P. W. 2 Abdulla, and advised him to take the injured persons to the hospital, and accordingly, the complainant was taken in a car to the hospital, where his injuries were examined. He was admitted as an indoor patient, while P. W. 2 was treated as to out-patient. P. W. 6, the elder brother of Abdulla P. W. 2, next day went to his lawyer, and as advised by him, he obtained the injury certificate of the complainant and then sent a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Cannanore. Since the case was not prosecuted by the Police, the complainant filed his complaint in Court on these allegations.

(3.) The complaint purported to bring a charge under Section 330 of the Indian Penal Code against two appellants which was an offence exclusively triable by the Court of Session, the Magistrate who held the enquiry, however came to the view that on the evidence adduced before him, there was no justification for committing the appellants for trial to the Court of Session, and consequently, discharged them..